Jamestown weekly alert. [volume] (Jamestown, Stutsman County, D.T. [N.D.]) 1882-1925, 1887-02-17
DEBATE ON DIVISION.
The Counc1lmen Exchange Sent1-
ments on the Question.

The late debate in the legislature con-
cerning the bill to submit to vote the
question of the division Of the territory
contains some highly interesting points
and brought out much valuable informa-
ton. Messrs. Hughes, McCumber, Gal
loway and Dodge opposed the bill. Mr.
Hughes attempted to attach ridiculous
amendments to the bill, his first being to
strike out the word division whore ever
it occurred, and insert Andover doctrines
instead. He said there was college
in South Dakota that was in trouble over
that doctrine, and he thought it would
be proper to submit that question to the
people. Mr.. Cain, who
DID MOST OF THE TALKING
for the div1slonlsJs, raJner got it back on
him by saying that if the doubt of the
gentleman from Burleigh as to his con-
dition in the hereafter could thus be set
tied it would be qualification to the
people of Dakota to express their opinion
on the doctrine of future rewards and
punishments for his benefit. Hughes
wanted to amend so that these questions
could be submitted: For or against di
vision, ''on the Missouri river" on "Apple
Creek" and son general principles" Sen
ator Grigsby said he was for division, but
would vote against the bill in it's present
form, as it would cost too much money
and do no good, as everybody knew that
as long as the democratic party was in
power. Dakota would be neither divided
nor admitted as whole, unless some
democratic state was created at the same
time, and the trouble and money spent
would be thrown away.
Mr. Dodge said to him that this measure
was novel one. The question is not as
to individual preferences-not, are you a
divisionist or against division-but it
seemed to him the only question was, is
this a Legitimate use of legislative power.
It should be discussed independent of
sectionality. This is a part OF the do
main of the United States; we have not
independent existence. Congress has
delegated to us simply certain rights OF
self government and the privilege to in
dicate our desires, subject to its right to
ratify OF neglect our action. The deci-
sion of the people Of the territory at an
unauthorized election settles nothing.
nor is it presumable the people will come
out and vote on one mooted question
when there are SO many. How can you
assume that the people want division
only on that one line. It is mooted
question over which the legislature has
no control. He believed that if this
question should be submitted at all, it
should be by authority Of congress, which
has power If congress wants an express
sion OF the people of Dakota, why does it
not provide for it. Ii that expression
would amount to anything now, congress
would have already asked it, He be-
ieved in the right of the people to indi-
cate how they should be governed, but
not in the right of part of the territory
to say it should be divided. He would
vote against this bill not because he was,
or was not, divisionist.
DR.. Collins moved to amend by chang
ing the time of holding the election from
June to November, and while discussing
the amendment the council adjourned.